A Model-Based Real-Time Decision Support System for Irrigation Scheduling to Improve Water Productivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A precisely timed irrigation schedule to match crop water demand is vital to improving water use efficiency in arid farmland. In this study, a real-time irrigation-scheduling infrastructure, Decision Support System for Irrigation Scheduling (DSSIS), based on water stresses predicted by an agro-hydrological model, was constructed and evaluated. The DSSIS employed the Root Zone Water Quality Model (RZWQM2) to predict crop water stresses and soil water content, which were used to trigger irrigation and calculate irrigation amount, respectively, along with forecasted rainfall. The new DSSIS was evaluated through a cotton field experiment in Xinjiang, China in 2016 and 2017. Three irrigation scheduling methods (DSSIS-based (D), soil moisture sensor-based (S), and conventional experience-based (E)), factorially combined with two irrigation rates (full irrigation (FI), and deficit irrigation (DI, 75% of FI)) were compared. The DSSIS significantly increased water productivity (WP) by 26% and 65.7%, compared to sensor-based and experience-based irrigation scheduling methods (p < 0.05), respectively. No significant difference was observed in WP between full and deficit irrigation treatments. In addition, the DSSIS showed economic advantage over sensor- and experience-based methods. Our results suggested that DSSIS is a promising tool for irrigation scheduling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".